CONSERVATION COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
January 10, 2011
Present: Kyla Bennett, Interim Chair; Michael Ganshirt, Vice Chair; John Grant, Jonathan
Chace, Christopher Patrick, Stephanie Danielson, Land Use Agent
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. The meeting is being taped by Easton Cable
Television
6:30 PM BOARD BUSINESS
Approval of Minutes: December 13, 2010
After review of the minutes, Michael Ganshirt motioned to approve the minutes as submitted,
seconded by Jonathan Chace. Motion passed (5-0-0)
Other Business
1. Land Management
a. No Motorized Vehicles on Town Property – Signs
Stephanie Danielson reports she was approached by Wayne Southworth (DPW Director)
who informed her that the DPW was willing to post signs on the town land as well as
conservation land, noting No Motorized Vehicles on Town Property. Staff is getting
quotes and will report back to the Commission.
b. Stephanie Danielson reported she received a call from the Police Department who
reports that the students in the Oliver Ames High School area are smoking in the
Conservation Commission behind the school. She suggests adding “No Smoking” to
the list of prohibited activities on conservation land. Concerned that, though the land
is open for public use, smoking presents a risk of fire and concern for the underage
smoking. However the Commission does not feel they have a way to get a handle on
the situation and feel the Police should handle.
2. Wheaton Farm – Use of Fields: Discussed putting the fields at Wheaton Farm, as
appropriate, back into agricultural production. Two possibilities raised were making fields
available for community gardening and/or exploring the potential for leasing fields for
production. Stephanie Danielson believes that the NRT currently has a waiting list for their
Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2011
2
community garden plots. Stephanie Danielson will discuss with the executive director of
NRT to see if they were interested in working with the Commission to make the fields at
Wheaton Farm part of their community gardening program. Mr. Grant suggested the fields
next to the main parking area would be suitable for community gardens.
3. Camping: Stephanie Danielson reports there is no real place to camp in Easton, though the
Commission does approve an annual camp-out to the Boy Scouts. She notes she is
suggesting the Commission open a camp ground. One thought was to offer overnight
camping, charge a fee and asked if the Commission be open to allowing this. Kyla Bennett
comments that camping has been allowed on a case by case basis, however concerned that if
it began to be a regular request, poses a risk of potential damage to the land. John Grant
comments that the boy scouts camp regularly and the girl scouts used to camp at the Flyaway
Pond area (behind the Lutheran Church). He suggests limiting to only the Scouts. Jonathan
Chace comments that if allowed should be restricted to the area the Scouts use. Christopher
Patrick agrees. The Commission feels should continue to assess on a case by case basis and
restrict to a certain area.
4. 198 & 202 Prospect Street – Request to Reconsider
Present: Todd Pilling, Pilling Engineering Group
Kyla Bennett read the staff report dated December 17, 2010 in which a letter from Pilling
Engineering (dated December 1, 2010) was received requesting reconsideration of the Permit for
Work for a Common Driveway that was denied by the Commission on September 13, 2010. The
Permit for Work was denied for the following reasons: 1. Lack of information that would allow
the Commission to determine that stormwater run-off from the site would not negatively impact
the resource areas of the abutting property, and 2. Lack of adequate evidence that the Isolated
Vernal Wetland is not a vernal pool.
The applicant has requested reconsideration based on the following:
1. NHESP reviewed the evidence provided by the abutters supporting their assertion the
IVW discussed during the hearing is a vernal pool. Natural Heritage determined the
evidence provided was not adequate to determine the IVW is a vernal pool.
2. During the hearings with the Planning Board, the applicant agreed, in response to
reducing the flow of stormwater off-site, to using an impervious paved surface for the
length of the common driveway as well as the individual driveways.
Todd Pilling comments only the first 134 feet was submitted as impervious and the Planning
Board recommended the first 410 feet be impervious. The runoff was calculated at 6% run-off
onto the abutters property.
Todd Pilling commented that the new plan (approved by the Planning Board) has a low impact
solution, less clearing, less paving and the houses are outside of the buffer zones (with roof
infiltration).
Kyla Bennett recalls her concern was the amount of the buffer zone impact and the impact to the
two certified vernal pools. She asks if the increase of runoff has been calculated with this new
pervious pavement. Todd Pilling did not have the calculations, however does believe there is a
minimal reduction from 6%.
Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2011
3
Kyla Bennett comments she would like to re-read the Commission’s denial before making an
informed decision to allow for reconsideration. She would also like a copy of the plan discussed
tonight, a well as a copy of the NHESP letter and would like to see the new calculations with the
pervious surface.
The Commission agreed to discuss at the January 24, 2011 meeting.
5. Discussion: 108 Canton Street culvert repair (Mike Luke)
Present: Mr. & Mrs. Luke
Stephanie Danielson began that the previous tenants caused the culvert to fill in and has caused
flooding and backup into the 3-bay barn (this was pointed out in the RFP). As part of the Luke’s
proposal, the indicated they would correct the culvert. In the meantime there is a large tree that
has grown into the channel (over time). Mr. Luke suggests instead of taking the tree down,
asking to move the location of the culvert by 10 feet. John Grant commented that the channel
was a hand dug and stone-lined ditch which had a little wooden bridge (that eventually rotted)
and the tenant at the time filled it in. Mr. Luke was thinking of using 12 inch ADS pipe up the
hill. Mr. Grant commented the size of the pipe would be sufficient (not a large flow). John
Grant commented that other channels exist on the property that allowed the Ames Company to
gain some more flow to the Shovelworks.
Stephanie Danielson commented that a NOI would have to be filed prior to beginning any
relocation of the culvert.
The Lukes commented they have 3 South African goats coming and are currently working on the
chicken coup.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (from December 27, 2010 that was cancelled due to winter storm)
7:22 P.M. 7 Massapoag Avenue; Applicant: Timothy Kiernan; DEP #: SE 152-1323;
Easton #:1129; Notice of Intent: proposed septic system repair
Present: Bill Gottwald, DMG Associates
The public hearing notice (original notification was for Monday, 11/29/10, which was continued
numerous times due to having no representation at prior meetings) and staff report (dated
November 29, 2010) were read into the record. The project is for the repair of the onsite septic
system, submitted via a Notice of Intent and plan titled “REPAIR, On-site Sewage Disposal
System, 7 Massapoag Ave., Easton, MA”, prepared for Bill Moreshead, by DMG Associates,
dated 9/18/10 and signed and stamped by William E. Gottwald, Jr.
Mr. Gottwald submitted revised plans which included the items missing from the original plan
(added the abutters, added the flood plain and relocation of the wetland flags.). Mr. Gottwald
explained that the estimated 100 year flood plain was determined by the original site plan and the
FEMA maps. He agrees to remove the tires that were discovered upon site inspection; however
comments he believes the tires are there to allow the excavator to go over the wall. He also
Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2011
4
comments that only 2 tests pits were dug and this is the most suitable site for the proposed septic
system.
Michael Ganshirt asks if the setbacks were as minimal as can be. Mr. Gottwald commented
could go as close as allowed to the test pit, which would pull the proposed work more out of the
buffer zone; however moving it closer to the house.
John Grant asked if the system was in legal failure. Mr. Gottwald comments that nothing has
been received from the Board of Health indicating such.
Jonathan Chace agrees to moving it farther outside the 50 foot buffer zone, if allowed.
Christopher Patrick had no comment.
Michael Ganshirt motions to continue to January 24, 2011, seconded by Christopher Patrick.
Motion passed (5-0-0)
34 Kilsyth Road; Applicant: Williams Powers; Rep: Collins Civil Engineering Group, Inc.;
DEP #: SE 152-1324; Easton #: 1131; Notice of Intent: proposed addition and repair of
septic system
Present: David Klenert, Collins Engineering
The public hearing notice and staff report (dated December 14, 2010) were read into the record.
The project is for the repair of the septic system, submitted via a Notice of Intent and plan titled
“Plan and Details Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Upgrade, 34 Kilsyth Road, South
Easton, MA”, prepared by Collins Civil Engineering Group, Inc, dated 12.1.10 and stamped by
George R. Collins.
Mr. Klenert explains the project as proposed. He comments that the system is a raised pump
chamber (a waiver was approved by the BOH from 3 foot to 4 foot). The mounded system will
rise above the existing ground by 3 feet. A proposed addition (where an existing deck is) is also
proposed (not noted in the public hearing or on the Notice of Intent) for which a variance was
received by the BOH.
Kyla Bennett comments there is not narrative in the application that talks about the proposed
addition and asked for clarification.
Mr. Klenert comments that the proposed addition is enclosing the existing deck and extending it
by 15 feet which is currently a lawn area and will be a 3-season room. The existing deck will be
taken down.
Kyla Bennett comments that all of this work is within the resource area and was not explained in
the Notice of Intent nor indicated on the plan and will need a detailed explanation of this work.
Kyla Bennett asked when the in-ground pool was put in. Mr. Klenert indicated he did not know
and will ask the homeowner. She also asked if the septic system is in failure. Mr. Klenert
comments that he believes the system is in failure.
No additional comments from the Commission.
Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2011
5
Christopher Patrick motioned to continue to January 24, 2011, seconded by Jonathan Chace.
Motion passed (5-0-0)
205 Bay Road: Applicant: Amy Lyons; Easton #: 1132; Permit for Work: proposed
installation of an above ground pool
Present: Amy Lyons
The public hearing notice and staff report (dated December 14, 2010) were read into the record.
The project is the installation of a 27’ round above-ground swimming pool submitted via an
Application for a Permit for Work and abstract plan titled “Plot Plan of Land in Easton” Permit
for Work for 205 Bay Road prepared by Amy Lyons, dated 12-13-10.
Amy Lyons explained that the original location for the pool (the solid circle) can move 30 feet
away from the wetland line) however if this area is not approved can relocate the pool to the
other area (dashed lines). This area has three large trees which may pose a danger; however can
trim back the branches. The commission feels this area is a more desired location (55 – 85 feet
away from the wetland line). The pool installer did indicate there will be a closed-looped
system.
Kyla Bennett and Michael Ganshirt commented they would like to see the location of the pool
moved further out of the resource area. The applicant commented that moving it further out
would put the pool in the front yard. A four foot fence will be installed around the pool area.
The fence will attach to the top of the pool and will be around the entire pool. The applicant
commented that moving the pool any further towards the front of the property would present a
safety concern.
John Grant feels the plan as proposed is fine.
Jonathan Chace asked if there was a garage and driveway. The applicant commented that the
garage and driveway are located to the right of the house (on the other side of the location of the
proposed pool).
Kyla Bennett asked if there was any way to move the pool a little bit farther away from the 50
foot wetland line. She also asked if there was a retaining wall needed and if so, to make sure it
would not go any closer than 5 feet from the 50 foot wetland line. Siltation fencing will need to
be installed at the 50 foot wetland line. Ms. Lyons comments that the installer has agreed to also
install haybales.
Abutters concerns included:
1. Tree removal in the wetland area and were reassured that none will be removed).
2. The location of a shed to the right rear – possibly within the 50 foot buffer zone.
Stephanie Danielson commented that the shed is a temporary, wooden shed that is up on
cinder blocks.
3. The fencing around the pool area (where there are a lot of toddlers in the area). Stephanie
Danielson commented that though the question is for the Building Inspector, the pool
area should be constructed with a fence and a locked gate as required.
Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2011
6
4. If the property was within the 100 year flood plain. Stephanie Danielson commented she
believed the site is not within the 100 year flood plain.
Kyla Bennett suggests that any safety concerned be addressed with the Building Inspector.
Kyla Bennett comments that the Commission seems to agree with the location of the pool to the
left rear and as well as the installation of siltation fencing or haybales. Any cutting of trees or
limbs would also have to be put before this Commission.
John Grant motioned to close the public hearing, seconded by Michael Ganshirt. Motion passed
(5-0-0)
John Grant motioned to issue a standard Permit for Work, seconded by Christopher Patrick.
Upon further discussion, Jonathan Chace questioned the location of the retaining wall, and the
plan does not indicate the slope, he would like to see that nothing would be constructed beyond
the 55 feet resource area. Motion to issue with conditions passed (5-0-0)
259 Massapoag Avenue (Borderland State Park); Applicant: Commonwealth of Mass;
Easton #: 1133; Request for Determination of Applicability: proposed replacement of a
fishing dock
Present: Elleanor Yahrmarket; James Flannagan, Boy Scout
The public hearing notice and staff report (dated January 4, 2011) were read into the record.
The project is to replace the damaged fishing dock on Leach Pond with a new fishing dock,
submitted via a Request for Determination of Applicability.
Michael Ganshirt motions to issue a Negative Determination of Applicability, seconded by John
Grant. Motion passed (5-0-0)
REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
11 Puddingstone Lane; Applicant: DKW Builders, Inc.; Easton #: 1117; Partial COC
DKW Builder, Inc. requested continuance to the January 24, 2011 meeting.
Michael Ganshirt motioned to continue to January 24, 2011, seconded by Christopher Patrick.
Motion passed (5-0-0)
14 Arthur Road; Applicant: DKW Builders, Inc.; DEP #: SE 152-1167; Easton: 0914;
Partial COC
DKW Builders, Inc. requested continuance to the January 24, 2011 meeting.
Stephanie Danielson explained that prior to the construction of the house, the developer filled the
culvert instead of constructing a bridge, and upon discovery of the culvert being filled in, was
instructed to remove all the fill and have it certified that all the fill was removed. This was done
and a temporary crossing was installed. No further additional work is allowed in the area until
the dry season (a condition of the Order of Conditions). The developer commented he was not
Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes, January 10, 2011
7
familiar with this process, believed he could fill the culvert, construct the house then install the
bridge.
Michael Ganshirt motioned to continued to January 24, 2011, seconded by Christopher Patrick.
Motion passed (5-0-0)
153 North Main Street; Applicant: Robert Carroll; DEP #: SE 152-1186; Easton #: 0934
The staff report (dated January 4, 2011) was read into the record. The project was for the
restoration of an area previously disturbed for construction of a roadway. The plan proposed
restoring the cleared and graded surface with loam and seed and for planting trees of indigenous
species trees and shrubs that provide food value to wildlife in the wetland and vernal pool buffer
zones.
Stephanie Danielson commented that the as-built was not submitted in time for her review and
the applicant requested continuing to January 24, 2011.
Michael Ganshirt motioned to continue to January 24, 2011, seconded by Jonathan Chase.
Motion passed (5-0-0)
153 Chestnut Street; Applicant: Michael Koska (formerly Dennis Czeck); Easton #: DET
204
Stephanie Danielson comments this is an old Determination of Applicability, which back then
the Commission required a Request for Certificate of Compliance and also the plan be recorded.
The applicant has asked to waive the condition the plan be recorded.
Michael Ganshirt motion to issue the Certificate of Compliance, seconded by Christopher
Patrick. Motion passed (5-0-0)
ADJOURN
Jonathan Chace motioned to adjourn at 8:30 p.m., seconded by Michael Ganshirt.
Respectfully submitted by Pamela Almeida, Recording Secretary.


This movie is part of the collection: Easton, Massachusetts

Audio/Visual: sound, color
Keywords: eastoncat; eastonma; government; conservation; meeting; massachusetts

Creative Commons license: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0

Individual Files

Be the first to write a review
Downloaded 135 times Reviews